Last meetings we talked about Draft Specification a couple of comments have been added

Working on putting more widgets in the test repository

Conversation

From Mash Ups perspective want to talk to Live mashups working on a shim/façade to set properties.

For Mashup case will need ability to get and set properties but this would not apply to the IDE scenario.

What are differences between approaches?

STU: Dojo and the other script libraries procedural EXT identifies landing path and run OnLoad to do Dom modification. The google model is much more declarative splice in HTML markup onAddOn behavior. The shim layer needs to communicate on that level. There needs to be from a run time perspective a shim level if a Widget does not provide its own property editor so that each Widget can have its properties modified.

Bertrand: How are we going to identify getters and setters?

Stu: What we did in Gadget spec would have a façade and the native library would implement the set and get.

In Dojo and Google Gadgets it would take a set request and translate it into an IGSetPrefs. Light weight layer to translate.

Why is the IDE Widget and API Metadata insufficient? Why not add some data to the Metadata instead of creating this new layer.

Stu: We need a handle in the run time environment. We have an onLoad that could refer to Javascript code that gets called.

Isn’t property x described in the metadata?

Yes, but what does it mean to call.

Couldn’t you have a callback function defined in an external .js file and for each property could specify an associated onSet and onGet callback function referenced in the external .js file, that gets called for a particular getter or setter.

There is about 10k of code for Google Getters and Setters per library for all Google Gadgets. Want to respect the size of the download.

W3C Widgets Spec

What is relation of the Widgets 1.0 Draft spec published 13 Oct 2007. Located below to what we are working on Widget
http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/

John is the liason to W3C. The author just joined OpenAjax. There focus is on desktop installable widgets. Like Apple Dashboard, YahooWidgets, Opera Widgets, Nokia and other companies have their Widgets. Our focus is in on UI Controls for Widgets in an IDE and in the context of mashups. W3C started earlier but is probably on a longer. Recommendation at the end of 2008. Till the end of 2009.

Our timeline We had been shooting for complete spec by end of 2007. We came close Jan 3. Maybe in a couple of months we will have general agreement on most of the issues. Hope to have some implementations by first half of the year.

Kevin: I think the thing that changed was including the Gadget task force. With injection of run time concepts. Hope to have a stabilized spec for late summer / early fall ratification.

Action: Scott to post missing attributes from the current Spec in implementation of Widgets for Dreamweaver. I would be glad to demo implementation of turning a Widget expressed in WidgetMeta data into an “Extension” for Dreamweaver.